Opinions on a C172C purchase

I had a 1961 172B and it was a great plane. The O-300 is very smooth, not too bad on gas, and sounds great. My engine had around 400 hrs since a recent overhaul from a good shop. My comps stayed up pretty good. That engine concerns me. Both comps, time since overhaul with lack of use, and who the heck knows who or what they did at the overhaul. I'd say you need to budget for a an overhaul in case it was needed. I did most of my instrument rating in my plane. Lucky it had a standard 6 pack instead of a shotgun panel with a VOR and an ILS. When I switched to GPS later, instrument flying suddenly became very easy compare to moving so many needles around, moving maps were like cheating. If you buy an IFR plane without GPS for your instrument, make sure you have enough non-gps approaches nearby to make it worthwhile.
 
Dan Thomas said:
...advice of other pilot friends that "those old airplanes are good old airplanes. Can't go wrong" led them into little or no flying and a lot of expensive repairs. Age does terrible things to airplanes, even low-time airplanes. Corrosion and rot never stop. All you can do is retard it some.
Click to expand...

People redefine "old airplanes" every year. I remember Martin Caidin's "Everything But the Flak". They flew 3 surplus (~15 year old) B-17's across the Atlantic. The first portion of the book was about how old and tired the airplanes were.

Today, a 15 or 20 year old airplane is considered almost new. It has to have fabric on it or be made of wood and 4130 before the FBO crowd consideres an airplane "old".

Those airport bums are wrong. The oldest 172's are pushing 70 years old... Ain't no doubt those are truly old...
 
kyleb said:
People redefine "old airplanes" every year. I remember Martin Caidin's "Everything But the Flak". They flew 3 surplus (~15 year old) B-17's across the Atlantic. The first portion of the book was about how old and tired the airplanes were.

Today, a 15 or 20 year old airplane is considered almost new. It has to have fabric on it or be made of wood and 4130 before the FBO crowd consideres an airplane "old".

Those airport bums are wrong. The oldest 172's are pushing 70 years old... Ain't no doubt those are truly old...
Click to expand...
Yup. The 172 I did most of my flight training in was six years old when I started. It wasn't considered newish at all. In fact, they stripped and painted it while I was training. Now it's 56 years old. Cessna's engineers never dreamed that these things would still be flying so far into the next century. Now I'm wondering if these old airplanes are still going to be flying in another 30 or 40 years. I do know that some of them are someday going to start falling out of the sky. Nothing lasts forever, and too many owners are happy with cheap walkaround annuals so that serious stuff isn't getting caught. I've seen too much of it.
 
My first airplane was a 1957 C-172 with the O-300. Great fun, inexpensive to buy and operate. Sold it for more than I paid for it.

One way to determine a price is to use Trade-A-Plane and other catalogs to search for similar aircraft. Drop the highest and lowest prices and average the rest, and you get a ballpark figure. There will be huge differences in avionics and engine hours that have to be considered.

Remember this: unless it is within driving distance, you have to consider the cost of going there to look at it and fly it. And you MUST fly it. And you MUST hire a mechanic to do a thorough pre-buy inspection. Well worth whatever it costs. Make sure the mechanic is not someone who has worked on that airplane before.
 
Dan Thomas said:
And lots aren't.

Wishful thinking does not trump knowledge, experience, and sound advice. It never did and never will.

I restored and owned a wooden airplane for 27 years and am intimately acquainted with the problems. I am a retired a Canadian AME (equivalent to US A&P/IA) and am also familiar with old Cessnas, in particular, that were nothing but heartbreak for their buyers. Their wishful thinking, or the advice of other pilot friends that "those old airplanes are good old airplanes. Can't go wrong" led them into little or no flying and a lot of expensive repairs. Age does terrible things to airplanes, even low-time airplanes. Corrosion and rot never stop. All you can do is retard it some.
Click to expand...


Same is true for most any airframe
 
SamSES said:
Same is true for most any airframe
Click to expand...
Yes, but wood is much more subject to decay than aluminum or tube and rag.

What is your maintenance experience?
 
kyleb said:
If I was in the market for a $45K airplane, I'd go buy a Piper Tomahawk for $35K and use the other $10K for upgrades/repairs.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the useful load isn't much use, as much as it's for hour building I need the ability to carry a passenger and some bags for weekends etc.
 
Swale said:
Unfortunately, the useful load isn't much use, as much as it's for hour building I need the ability to carry a passenger and some bags for weekends etc.
Click to expand...

500+ lb useful load, typically. I did plenty of weekend and longer trips in mine including hauling 2 people and camping gear to Oshkosh multiple times. Limit the legs to 2 -2.5 hours and you might make it work.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Yes, but wood is much more subject to decay than aluminum or tube and rag.

What is your maintenance experience?
Click to expand...

25 years of flying for a living, and wrenching on my own for fun


Wood rote, aluminum corrodes, good maintenance helps all, bad vise versa

First plane I flew had wood wings, it still flying just fine
 
kyleb said:
If I was in the market for a $45K airplane, I'd go buy a Piper Tomahawk for $35K and use the other $10K for upgrades/repairs.
Click to expand...
No Tommy's worth buying less than $40K or so now - one is up for about $25K, but the engine is toast, it's got about 2,000 hours left on the wings, and spent its life as a trainer. There have been recent ones at $39K, not quite as bad, but needing a lot. $60K+ asking for one in excellent shape.
 
Tom Wells said:
Member Steingar is selling a Mooney Ranger (same year as your Cessna I think) and I am 100% positive it would be a ****load more fun to fly than a 172. And I think his ad says it only burns 8-9gph IIRC...

You'd get retractable, a magical blue lever (I think it's constant speed), MANY more knots and a bigger gas tank to go places. As a new PPL I would have done that 1000x over instead of a 172.
Click to expand...

As a new PPL good luck with insurance on a Mooney or really any retract. In that same hull value range I was quoted $7-8k / yr insurance for a Mooney as a newbie.
 
Todd82 said:
As a new PPL good luck with insurance on a Mooney or really any retract. In that same hull value range I was quoted $7-8k / yr insurance for a Mooney as a newbie.
Click to expand...

yup too pricey for me I think that is more for a day in the future hopefully
 
Todd82 said:
As a new PPL good luck with insurance on a Mooney or really any retract. In that same hull value range I was quoted $7-8k / yr insurance for a Mooney as a newbie.
Click to expand...
Mine was half that, in the mid 3s for first year. That was for an arrow, hull value 75k and the day after my PPL checkride...
 
SamSES said:
25 years of flying for a living, and wrenching on my own for fun


Wood rote, aluminum corrodes, good maintenance helps all, bad vise versa

First plane I flew had wood wings, it still flying just fine
Click to expand...
I wrenched for a living and was also a flight instructor for a few years. When you deal with many airplanes, not just one or two, you start seeing some shocking stuff. There is a LOT of bad maintenance out there.

I had an engine failure in a glider tug. The carburetor fell off. It was on a Gipsy Major in an Auster, and the carb is a downdraft affair that sits on top of the intake manifold alongside the engine. No lockwiring on the bolts, and they rattled out until the throttle linkage (actual linkage, not a cable) tipped it off the manifold, with one almost-out bolt holding it cocked, when I closed the throttle to descend back to the airport. Deadsticked it in. Same airplane broke a tailwheel bolt. Corrosion. The left forward MLG bolt lost its head, again due to corrosion. Bolt was backing out when I spotted it.

I had another engine failure in a Champ. The crankshaft broke, probably as a result of a long-ago propstrike. They used to just "dial" the crank flange and see if it was still pretty straight, and figured that was good enough. Now we know that cranks can twist and bend quite a bit during a propstrike, then spring back, but a crack has started that takes many more hours to bust the crank. Deadsticked that one in, too.

I quit flying the glider tug. Lousy maintenance by the club. The following year it quit on another pilot shortly after takeoff and was damaged in the forced landing. I bought it and started restoring it, and found that there was damage unrelated to the forced landing, damage incurred when a windstorm broke it free and banged it into a hangar a few years before, and more damage that happened when another windstorm flipped it onto its back. The aft spar in the right wing was cracked 3/4 of the way through the strut attach area. Wooden spar. That was from landing on its back. Five of the eight drag/antidrag wires were broken in the same wing, from whacking the wingtip into the hangar. And I had been flying the airplane with that broken spar and brace wires.

I ferried a 172. When we took it apart for inspection, we found 134 serious snags. Among them were missing nuts on the lower strut bolts under the floor. Horizontal stab spar broken all the way through. Cracks in many other places including fuselage bulkheads. The rudder was displaced forward, bending the hinges and spars. Backed into something. Patches in the aluminum skins made of galvanized sheet steel. (Seriously.) The hole in the belly for the ADF antenna cable looking like it had been cut with an axe. Many points where cracks could start. Every control system was far out of rig. That airplane could have come apart anytime. It was another classic case of an owner doing his own wrenching, with a friendly mechanic signing it off. And it had just had an annual! Ignorance kills. I have encountered similar stupid stuff in other owner-maintained airplanes.

You should know now that old airplanes are not to be trusted without thorough, really thorough, inspections. Like I also said earlier, I have watched too many owners get financially hosed by the lethal defects that show up on the first inspection after purchase. Just because some airplane you know that has wooden wings is still flying, doesn't mean that they're all OK. That's the mistake too many people make. There are pristine old airplanes and there are exactly the same models in the junkyard, trashed because they were beyond repair. The difference is in how seriously the owners take the maintenance.

When I restored my Jodel, the wooden airplane, I found mildew and rot under the fabric. Found broken glue joints. Found rot around rusted steel attach bolts. Like I said earlier, a wooden airframe, or any wooden component, has to be kept dry and has to be carefully monitored at annuals. I've had too many close calls to be a casual inspector. And I've seen WAY too much bad stuff to be fooled by nice paint and interior anymore.
 
Last edited:
Dan Thomas said:
I wrenched for a living and was also a flight instructor for a few years. When you deal with many airplanes, not just one or two, you start seeing some shocking stuff. There is a LOT of bad maintenance out there.

I had an engine failure in a glider tug. The carburetor fell off. It was on a Gipsy Major in an Auster, and the carb is a downdraft affair that sits on top of the intake manifold alongside the engine. No lockwiring on the bolts, and they rattled out until the throttle linkage (actual linkage, not a cable) tipped it off the manifold, with one almost-out bolt holding it cocked, when I closed the throttle to descend back to the airport. Deadsticked it in. Same airplane broke a tailwheel bolt. Corrosion. The left forward MLG bolt lost its head, again due to corrosion. Both was backing out when I spotted it.

I had another engine failure in a Champ. The crankshaft broke, probably as a result of a long-ago propstrike. They used to just "dial" the crank flange and see if it was still pretty straight, and figured that was good enough. Now we know that cranks can twist and bend quite a bit during a propstrike, then spring back, but a crack has started that takes many more hours to bust the crank. Deadsticked that one in, too.

I quit flying the glider tug. Lousy maintenance by the club. The following year it quit on another pilot shortly after takeoff and was damaged in the forced landing. I bought it and started restoring it, and found that there was damage unrelated to the forced landing, damage incurred when a windstorm broke it free and banged it into a hangar a few years before, and more damage that happened when another windstorm flipped it onto its back. The aft spar in the right wing was cracked 3/4 of the way through the strut attach area. Wooden spar. That was from landing on its back. Five of the eight drag/antidrag wires were broken in the same wing, from whacking the wingtip into the hangar. And I had been flying the airplane with that broken spar and brace wires.

I ferried a 172. When we took it apart for inspection, we found 134 serious snags. Among them were missing nuts on the lower strut bolts under the floor. Horizontal stab spar broken all the way through. Cracks in many other places including fuselage bulkheads. The rudder was displaced forward, bending the hinges and spars. Backed into something. Patches in the aluminum skins made of galvanized sheet steel. (Seriously.) The hole in the belly for the ADF antenna cable looking like it had been cut with an axe. Many points where cracks could start. Every control system was far out of rig. That airplane could have come apart anytime. It was another classic case of an owner doing his own wrenching, with a friendly mechanic signing it off. And it had just had an annual! Ignorance kills. I have encountered similar stupid stuff in other owner-maintained airplanes.

You should know now that old airplanes are not to be trusted without thorough, really thorough, inspections. Like I also said earlier, I have watched too many owners get financially hosed by the lethal defects that show up on the first inspection after purchase. Just because some airplane you know that has wooden wings is still flying, doesn't mean that they're all OK. That's the mistake too many people make. There are pristine old airplanes and there are exactly the same models in the junkyard, trashed because they were beyond repair. The difference is in how seriously the owners take the maintenance.

When I restored my Jodel, the wooden airplane, I found mildew and rot under the fabric. Found broken glue joints. Found rot around rusted steel attach bolts. Like I said earlier, a wooden airframe, or any wooden component, has to be kept dry and has to be carefully monitored at annuals. I've had too many close calls to be a casual inspector. And I've seen WAY too much bad stuff to be fooled by nice paint and interior anymore.
Click to expand...


I don’t trust a 2yr old airframe without proper mx

Old wood plane with rot, newer un cared for plane with inter grainal, same bad stuff
 
Dan Thomas said:
I wrenched for a living and was also a flight instructor for a few years. When you deal with many airplanes, not just one or two, you start seeing some shocking stuff. There is a LOT of bad maintenance out there.

I had an engine failure in a glider tug. The carburetor fell off. It was on a Gipsy Major in an Auster, and the carb is a downdraft affair that sits on top of the intake manifold alongside the engine. No lockwiring on the bolts, and they rattled out until the throttle linkage (actual linkage, not a cable) tipped it off the manifold, with one almost-out bolt holding it cocked, when I closed the throttle to descend back to the airport. Deadsticked it in. Same airplane broke a tailwheel bolt. Corrosion. The left forward MLG bolt lost its head, again due to corrosion. Both was backing out when I spotted it.

I had another engine failure in a Champ. The crankshaft broke, probably as a result of a long-ago propstrike. They used to just "dial" the crank flange and see if it was still pretty straight, and figured that was good enough. Now we know that cranks can twist and bend quite a bit during a propstrike, then spring back, but a crack has started that takes many more hours to bust the crank. Deadsticked that one in, too.

I quit flying the glider tug. Lousy maintenance by the club. The following year it quit on another pilot shortly after takeoff and was damaged in the forced landing. I bought it and started restoring it, and found that there was damage unrelated to the forced landing, damage incurred when a windstorm broke it free and banged it into a hangar a few years before, and more damage that happened when another windstorm flipped it onto its back. The aft spar in the right wing was cracked 3/4 of the way through the strut attach area. Wooden spar. That was from landing on its back. Five of the eight drag/antidrag wires were broken in the same wing, from whacking the wingtip into the hangar. And I had been flying the airplane with that broken spar and brace wires.

I ferried a 172. When we took it apart for inspection, we found 134 serious snags. Among them were missing nuts on the lower strut bolts under the floor. Horizontal stab spar broken all the way through. Cracks in many other places including fuselage bulkheads. The rudder was displaced forward, bending the hinges and spars. Backed into something. Patches in the aluminum skins made of galvanized sheet steel. (Seriously.) The hole in the belly for the ADF antenna cable looking like it had been cut with an axe. Many points where cracks could start. Every control system was far out of rig. That airplane could have come apart anytime. It was another classic case of an owner doing his own wrenching, with a friendly mechanic signing it off. And it had just had an annual! Ignorance kills. I have encountered similar stupid stuff in other owner-maintained airplanes.

You should know now that old airplanes are not to be trusted without thorough, really thorough, inspections. Like I also said earlier, I have watched too many owners get financially hosed by the lethal defects that show up on the first inspection after purchase. Just because some airplane you know that has wooden wings is still flying, doesn't mean that they're all OK. That's the mistake too many people make. There are pristine old airplanes and there are exactly the same models in the junkyard, trashed because they were beyond repair. The difference is in how seriously the owners take the maintenance.

When I restored my Jodel, the wooden airplane, I found mildew and rot under the fabric. Found broken glue joints. Found rot around rusted steel attach bolts. Like I said earlier, a wooden airframe, or any wooden component, has to be kept dry and has to be carefully monitored at annuals. I've had too many close calls to be a casual inspector. And I've seen WAY too much bad stuff to be fooled by nice paint and interior anymore.
Click to expand...

Galvanized sheet steel? As in the stuff you can buy at home Depot?

.. I hope they didn't have too many patches, because if my chem knowledge isn't too rusty I think it's about 3x as heavy as aluminum...

On the plus side his patches should take a while to rust! :eek:
 
First, we're 57 messages into the thread and no one told the OP to buy a BO ... what is the world coming to?:eek::confused:;)

Second, some of you guys fly pretty ragged-out aircraft:eek:

Third, I'm grateful my ride sits like a queen in a hangar, out of the elements here in the desert southwest.

To the OP. If you interested in a Tiger, call FletchAir and talk to Dave Fletch - that shop in Fredericksburg specializes in them and he may know someone with a real clean one looking to sell. If not a Tiger which are dirt simple to fly, check with the any specialty shop dealing with the ride you like, they'll know where the good ones are ...
 
Tom Wells said:
Galvanized sheet steel? As in the stuff you can buy at home Depot?

.. I hope they didn't have too many patches, because if my chem knowledge isn't too rusty I think it's about 3x as heavy as aluminum...

On the plus side his patches should take a while to rust! :eek:
Click to expand...
Yeah, the heating duct stuff. Fastened with cheap pop rivets. On control surfaces, upsetting the mass balance. Asking for flutter. Cessna manuals spend a lot of pages on that.

There are guys that work on their airplanes, not using the knowledge and skills taught in aircraft mechanic schools because they didn't go there, not using the service manuals for the airplane or engine or prop, not using aircraft-grade materials, not torquing hardware to aircraft specifications. That last one alone damages a lot of stuff. I have seen damaged aluminum control surface hinge parts from incorrect torques given right there in the manual. Some guys think that since they do their own car maintenance they can also do their own airplane maintenance. But cars are not airplanes. Never were. Cars were never made light enough to fly. Airplanes are, but that makes them rather fragile and easily damaged by the wrong techniques.
 
Todd82 said:
How long ago?
Click to expand...
That was from October 2020. By October 2021 it was down to about $2.5k. Now it's at 2.2k ish. With AVEMCO.
A 182 with the same hull value would only save me 400$ last I checked (though I don't think you can buy a 182 for anywhere close to 75k anymore).
 
I would pass. First annual is going to be $$$
Questions on engine
Prop
Avionics don’t suit your needs
There is a lot more to look at mx wise that you’ll quickly learn once you’re an owner who is actively flying.
 
Spend the money to get something newer and better equipped. You will regret it if you don’t and probably end up poorer anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top